The carbon tax is wonderful

[SDB777]

I thought trees needed carbon to grow.....so we reduce the carbon and watch the trees die?


We already went through the Carbon Tax thing here in the States....see where all our jobs went. Don't worry, your jobs will follow ours there as well. Carbon tax = Al Gore getting rich.





Scott B

[Big Shed]

I thought trees needed carbon to grow.....so we reduce the carbon and watch the trees die?


We already went through the Carbon Tax thing here in the States....see where all our jobs went. Don't worry, your jobs will follow ours there as well. Carbon tax = Al Gore getting rich.





Scott B

Wasn't aware that the US had a carbon tax, when and how was that implemented?

Al Gore, isn't he the guy who uses 4 times as much energy as any other "normal" family?

[artme]

I have serious doubts about the carbon tax moving jobs off shore.

Low wges in China and the high Aus$ do a much better job of that. I think the same was true for the US.

[damian]

Many people outside the US fail to distinguish between state and federal government. Our states defer to teh federal government and their are set role for each to some extent. In the US and Canada the federal government does not automatically overrule the states, so for example the US does have gun laws just not federal ones, and several states have implemented a carbon trading scheme which is failing spectacularly.

The chicago exchange set up a trading floor for carbon thinking it was on a winner. They shut it down about 2 months ago, no volume virtually no price. Like I've said the brokers and other miscellaneous thieves in the finance industry saw the carbon thing as a great platform to rob us, but thier plans have been thwarted by the middle aged middle class who've seen these scams too many times before.

[artme]

Just went back through some replies here at random.

Seems that some are confusing a carbon tax with an emissions or carbon trading scheme.

They are not the same animal even though the intended result may be the same.

With a trading scheme you can choose to participate or not.

You cannot avoid a tax.

[Vernonv]

You cannot avoid a tax.

Just don't turn on that light/TV/spa pump/clothes drier, etc, etc.

[bluegum30]

''Just don't turn on that light/TV/spa pump/clothes drier, etc, etc.''

my thoughts exactly .

[Bob38S]

And so it begins -

- get your wallet out -

- learn to walk lopsided as it is difficult to walk properly when the government has its hand in your pocket.

Council rubbishes the carbon tax | Fraser Coast News | Local News in Fraser Coast | Fraser Coast Chronicle

[damian]

Just went back through some replies here at random.

Seems that some are confusing a carbon tax with an emissions or carbon trading scheme.

They are not the same animal even though the intended result may be the same.

With a trading scheme you can choose to participate or not.

You cannot avoid a tax.

Not sure I understand you. They are two similar mechanisms aimed at the same outcome.

If your one of the top 200 or whatever it is generators of CO2 in Australia every ton of carbon dioxide you emit into the atmosphere has to be paid for either by buying a permit or paying a fixed levy/tax/whatever to the federal government.

When the trading scheme kicks in the price will be determined by supply and demand.

So far overseas that's lead to virtually nil price and low volumes for the permits. If that situation persists when the Australian scheme goes open market the companies will be able to buy half their permits at low prices overseas, and that revenue won't be available for the Australian government to fulfill their promises of compensation, investment and research.

Those promises will have to be funded from consolidated revenue, which means either higher taxes, broken promises or funding cuts to other government activities.

Meanwhile the actual cost plus whatever they think they can get away with will be passed on to customers by the emmitters. Various people have modelled this with various numbers being kicked about. It's a hard thing to predict accurately because of our complex interlinked economy.

The emmitters list is interesting. As I recall there are two universities in there. Not necessarily who you expect to be "naughty polluters".

[Vernonv]

... every ton of carbon dioxide you emit into the atmosphere has to be paid for either by buying a permit or paying a fixed levy/tax/whatever to the federal government.

The later is a carbon tax (what the gov want to implement) and the former is carbon trading scheme (that was ditched by the gov).

I haven't been looking at the detail, but I was under the impression that what the gov want to introduce is a tax and NOT a CTS i.e. the polluter pays the tax regardless and can't offset that by buying carbon credits.

[woodbe]

what the gov want to introduce is a tax and NOT a CTS i.e. the polluter pays the tax regardless and can't offset that by buying carbon credits.

They say they want a CTS but they are starting with a Tax - the ETS comes later after everyone realises that the world did not end after all.

[Greg Ward]

No one is suggesting the world will end, all they are saying is that this is an unnecessary impost on Australian business and homes that will have no affect on the carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

If the Government wants to have new taxes, that's OK. But that's a separate discussion
Greg

[Ozkaban]

I'm a bit late to this debate, and apologies if I've not read every word of some of the longer posts...

My view is that while there is a need to reduce emissions, and not necessarily just CO2, I'm just not convinced a new tax will achieve that.

A few years ago, we had petrol climb from about 85c/l to about $1.60-1.70c/l in about 5 years. That's doubling the cost. The reduction in fuel usage was about 5%. That's it. Why? Because we still need our cars and trucks. Because there isn't a good enough alternative.

If a carbon emission reduction is to be effective, then jacking up electricity prices isn't going to achieve much - there needs to be an alternative. Sure there are other technologies such as solar, etc in the same way there are other methods of transport to cars, but at the end of the day I need to use electricity in my home and so I will just have to suck it up and pay more. I am already fairly efficient with power in the house, but increasing the price by whatever % isn't really going to change that much.

Change may come, but it will be slow because the incentive isn't there - making consumers pay more will just mean consumers pay more, nothing else.

Cheers,
Dave

[woodbe]

If the Government wants to have new taxes, that's OK. But that's a separate discussion
Greg

True, except as far as I can tell, the government has made it the same discussion. It's an attempt to do something about carbon emissions with a tax.

And there are plenty of people beating this up as if it is the end of the world.

[Greg Ward]

They once used to have a window tax and as far as I can see, the carbon tax fits into the same stupid mould.
The way things are going, the greens will bring back the window tax as they let out heat and will increase global warming